- From: <ewallace@cme.nist.gov>
- Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 14:31:39 -0400 (EDT)
- To: noy@SMI.Stanford.EDU, rector@cs.man.ac.uk
- Cc: tu@SMI.Stanford.EDU, public-swbp-wg@w3.org
Alan Rector wrote: >I don't have my language lawyer papers with me so I am not sure if you can >have inverse functional data type properties. If you can't, then the above >becomes even more complicated and you can't quite express all the constraints >in OWL. Alas one cannot have InverseFunctional DatatypeProperties in OWL DL :(. OWL Ref. almost describes this limitation as a feature which simplifies the DL syntax! Obvious hacks of simply moving the data value to an object and making that relation 1-to-1 apparently are not comestible to Racer either, even though Protege tests indicate the ontology to be DL. -Evan
Received on Friday, 20 August 2004 18:31:44 UTC